Ex-DOJ Officials Sue Over Political Purge Tied to January 6th Prosecutions

 

Former DOJ Officials Sue Trump-Era Administration Over Alleged Political Firings

A new lawsuit is shedding light on what former Justice Department officials are calling a deeply troubling pattern of political retaliation within the Trump-era DOJ. Three former federal employees who played significant roles in the prosecutions stemming from the January 6th Capitol attack are suing for wrongful termination — claiming they were dismissed without cause, warning, or legal justification.

The plaintiffs include:

Michael Gordon, a former federal prosecutor who led several major January 6th cases.

Patricia Hartman, a public affairs specialist who handled communications related to those cases.

Joseph Tirrell, former head of the DOJ’s Departmental Ethics Office.

All three were terminated within a two-week span — without any formal explanation. Gordon was dismissed on June 27, the same day as two other assistant U.S. attorneys involved in January 6th prosecutions. Hartman was fired on July 7, mid-workday. Tirrell followed on July 11, also without cause.

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs allege their firings were politically motivated acts of retaliation, directly linked to their work on high-profile prosecutions viewed as politically sensitive by the Trump-aligned leadership at the time. The firings were carried out by Attorney General Pam Bondi, a loyal Trump ally who had been appointed to oversee the DOJ in a temporary capacity.

The complaint argues that Bondi overstepped her authority, violated civil service protections, and undermined the principle of impartial justice. Specifically, it states that the dismissals were:

“Not in accordance with the law,”

“Contrary to a constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity,”

and “In excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right.”

Bondi didn’t stop with these three. According to reports, she also terminated at least 20 additional staffers who were working with Special Counsel Jack Smith on January 6th and related investigations — further reinforcing what the plaintiffs claim is a clear pattern of political retribution.

In an interview with WFLA, Michael Gordon explained the legal stakes plainly:

“The law requires that the government cannot fire a federal prosecutor without first giving warning and then giving a justification — a merit-based reason for firing.”

The plaintiffs argue that allowing partisan officials to remove DOJ staff without due process threatens the independence of the U.S. justice system itself. “Employees should be protected against arbitrary action, personal favoritism, or coercion for partisan political purposes,” their suit states.

If successful, the case could set a powerful legal precedent about the limits of political authority within the Department of Justice — especially during times of heightened political tension and election-year scrutiny.